Retention, Tenure & Promotion

Montana State University, the State’s land-grant institution, educates students, creates knowledge and art, and serves communities, by integrating learning, discovery, and engagement.

The faculty, staff, and administrators in the College of Letters & Science support the fulfillment of the University’s teaching, scholarship, and service mission in the humanities, mathematical sciences, social sciences and natural sciences.

The College of Letters and Science (CLS), the most academically diverse of the University’s colleges, is a critical teaching and research unit in Montana’s land-grant institution. The mission of the College is to prepare students to think analytically and creatively in a liberal arts tradition, to engage in scholarship of the highest caliber, and to make meaningful contributions to our local community, the state of Montana, regional, national, and global society.

Every faculty member is expected to fulfill the university and college mission through teaching, scholarship, service, and integration. The teaching goal of the College is threefold: (1) to offer an academic curriculum that provides for the general education of all Montana State University students, (2) to offer an enriched educational experience to students majoring in the diverse disciplines of the College of Letters and Science, and (3) to provide quality programs of graduate study in those disciplines authorized to grant post-baccalaureate degrees.

Faculty members are expected to engage in scholarship of the highest caliber. Thus, every faculty member is expected to develop and maintain an active program of scholarship consistent with standards of their discipline.

Faculty members are expected to engage in service activities with the general public, from global, national, state and local entities to professional organizations within academic disciplines. Faculty also have responsibilities to serve on department, College, and University committees.

In summary, faculty in the College of Letters and Science provide three interrelated and complementary roles: undergraduate and graduate instruction, scholarship, and service to the people of Montana and beyond. The integration among the roles is fundamental to our mission as a land grant university.

Academic Programs of the College

Agricultural Economics & Economics, B.S., M.S.

Cell Biology & Neuroscience, B.S., M.S., Ph.D.

Chemistry & Biochemistry, B.S. Ph.D.

Earth Sciences, B.S., M.S., Ph.D.

Ecology, B.S., M.S., Ph.D.

English, B.A., M.A.

History & Philosophy, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.

Mathematical Sciences, B.S., M.S., Ph.D.

Microbiology & Immunology, B.S., M.S., Ph.D.

Modern Languages & Literatures, B.A.

Native American Studies, Minor, M.A.

Physics, B.S., M.S., Ph.D.

Political Science, B.S., M.P.A.

Psychology, B.S., Ph.D.

Sociology & Anthropology, B.S.

Interdisciplinary Academic Programs

American Studies, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.

Asian Studies, B.A.

Latin American & Latino Studies, option

Liberal Studies, B.A.

Master of Science in Science Education, M.S.

Women, Gender & Sexuality Studies, minor

Centers

Western Lands & People

Writing Center

CLS faculty also contribute to the WWAMI program and other centers across campus.

Research faculty are nontenurable faculty whose assignment principally involves time and effort on research projects funded by University grants and contracts, administered by the Office of Sponsored Research. They are appointed on grant funds using the processes and procedures of their home department. Initial appointment is generally as an Assistant Research Professor unless the candidate’s research record warrants appointment at a higher rank.

Research faculty members are reviewed and promoted using the processes and procedures of their home department. When the research faculty member has a significant commitment in a second department, or a research center or institute, the department head or director of the non-home department should provide a written evaluation of the candidate’s scholarship for inclusion in the candidate’s dossier.

An annual review assesses a faculty member’s performance over the preceding calendar year. The annual review process, appeals to the dean, and changes in assigned percentages of effort are described in the University Faculty Handbook.

Materials to be submitted as well as designation of administrators and/or committees that conduct annual reviews are determined by departments according to their own Role and Scope standards and consistent with the University Faculty Handbook.

Section 4.01 Primary Review Committee-Composition and Appointment

The Primary Review Committee is the Departmental Committee and is composed and appointed consistent with the University Faculty Handbook. Units are encouraged to adopt selection procedures for committee members that will promote membership which is inclusive of the categories protected by the university Non-Discrimination Policy.

The composition of the Primary Review Committee can vary by department and must comply with the University Faculty Handbook regarding potential conflicts of interest. In their Role and Scope documents, departments may elaborate how these guidelines apply to their review processes. The committee can consist of (a) all members of the department who meet University guidelines regarding faculty rank; or, (b) a subset of all those department members who meet University guidelines regarding faculty rank.

The Primary Review Committee can be established by appointment or by election.   The method of establishment should be described in the Departmental Role and Scope.

Section 4.02 Primary Review Administrator

The Primary Review Administrator typically is the department head or director of a program. Should the Primary Review Administrator have a conflict of interest with a candidate under review, the CLS Dean will identify an individual to serve as Primary Review Administrator for the case under review.

Section 4.03 Identification of Responsible Entities

Each department, consistent with the University Faculty Handbook, shall identify in its Role and Scope Document the party that will carry out each of the following:

• Establish the Primary Review Committee either by facilitating election or appointment of the members.
• Select external reviewers and solicit review letters.
• If internal reviews are part of the unit’s review process, select and solicit internal reviews.
• Ensure the following materials are included in the dossier:
• Letters of solicitation for internal and/or external letters, letters from the reviewers, and in the case of external reviewers, a short bio-sketch of the reviewer.
• Applicable Role and Scope document.
• Letter of hire, any percentages of effort changes, all annual reviews, and all evaluation letters from prior retention, tenure, and promotion reviews at MSU.
• Candidate’s teaching evaluations from the review period. Upon request by review committees and review administrators, the unit will provide access to the original evaluations to review committees and administrators during the review.
• Maintain copies of all review committee evaluationletters including internal letters after the review.

Section 4.04 Next Review Level

The next review level after the reviews by the Primary Review Committee and the Primary Review Administrator is the College of Letters & Science Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee (CLSRTPC).

The intermediate review committee is the College of Letters and Science Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee and conducts an independent review of the dossier in accordance with the responsibilities delineated in Sections 2 through 6 of the University Faculty Handbook Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Rights and Responsibilities.

Section 5.01 CLS Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee Composition, Election, and Appointment

The College of Letters and Science Retention, Tenure and Promotion Committee consists of five tenured faculty members, at least three of whom must be elected by tenurable faculty of the college.   Elected members serve staggered three-year terms.   The remaining members will be appointed by the Dean for renewable terms of one year.  In addition to the requirements described in the University Faculty Handbook, the College of Letters and Sciences recognizes the value of disciplinary diversity when selecting members of review committees at the college and departmental levels.  To that end, the Dean should appoint members consistent with this objective, particularly when an individual’s academic expertise is needed at the departmental level.

In making these appointments, the Dean should be cognizant of the impact appointments to the college level committee may have on faculty available to serve on primary review committees. Units are encouraged to adopt selection procedures for committee members that will promote membership which is inclusive of the categories protected by the university Non-Discrimination Policy.

An individual may only serve on one review committee, the departmental, college, or university.

Section 5.01.2   Responsibilities of the Committee

The committee shall determine, to the best of its ability, whether a candidate’s preceding reviews have been conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and the University Faculty Handbook. The committee also conducts a fair, objective, independent, and substantive review of the candidate’s dossier based on department, college, and university criteria and standards. In cases of non-concurrence with a preceding review, the recommendation shall include a written rationale for non- concurrence.

The college review committee is also responsible for:

• Preparing a written recommendation, with vote tally, concerning the retention, tenure, and/or promotion of each candidate for review; and
• Reviewing, making suggestions for modification, and approving the Role and Scope, criteria and standards documents of the departments; and
• Reviewing, making suggestions for modification, and approving the Role and Scope, criteria and standards documents of the college.

Section. 5.01.3 Actions of the Committee

The CLSRTPC prepares a written recommendation, with vote tally, concerning the retention, tenure, and/or promotion of each. The recommendation becomes a permanent part of the faculty member’s personnel files maintained in the Dean’s office.

For formal review of a candidate, the college committee first reviews the criteria listed in this document and the appropriate Departmental Role and Scope, Procedures, Standards and Criteria documents.

Following detailed discussion of the merits of each case, each member indicates her/his vote.

All recommendations are summarized by the college committee in a letter to the Dean which is placed in the dossier and provided to each candidate under review. Copies of these letters are sent to the appropriate department head and kept in the faculty personnel file in the Dean’s office.

Section 5.01.4 Procedures for Electing College Representatives to the University Promotion and Tenure Committee

A call for nominations is made to all CLS tenured and tenurable faculty. The nominees must be from among the tenured associate professors and full professors within the college. Normally, at least one half of the members will have attained the rank of professor. No faculty member up for review may serve on the committee. No URTPC member may simultaneously serve on either the college or departmental committee. Members normally serve for one three-year term. CLS will also use the same process to elect an alternate who will serve if the elected member is unable to serve.

A ballot is drawn up from the list of nominees consisting of those who meet the criteria shown above and who agree to serve on the committee should they be elected. A college-wide election is held with the top vote-getter serving on the committee and the second vote-getter serving as an alternate.

Section 5.02 Intermediate Review Administrator

The dean shall determine, to the best of her or his ability, whether the candidate’s preceding reviews were conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and University Faculty Handbook. The dean shall also conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate’s dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. In cases of non-concurrence with a preceding review, the recommendation shall include a written rationale for non-concurrence.

The college dean is also responsible for:

• Informing faculty members, committee members, and department heads of the applicable timelines for review.
• Setting dates and times in accordance with those set by the Provost. In general, this means the departmental review will be done by the end of the fall semester.
• Ensuring that the election of faculty representatives to the college and UPT Committees is conducted in a timely matter.
• The election of the members of the CLSRTPC and the college representation to the URTPC is conducted by the Dean’s Office.
• Forwarding the candidate’s dossier, with her or his recommendations, to the URTPC and sending a copy of the written recommendation to the candidate and department head.
• Maintain a copy of dossier. 

Section 5.03 Level of Review Following Intermediate Review Administrator

The next level of review after the Intermediate Review Administrator is UTPC. See 5.01.4 for the procedures for election of CLS representatives to URTPC.

Review materials submitted by the candidate shall comply with the University Faculty Handbook document “Annual Review: Retention, Tenure and Promotion,” subsection “RTP: Rights and Responsibilities,” sections 1 and 7. Additionally, candidates in the College of Letters and Science must follow the requirements below.

Section 6.01 Materials submitted by Candidate

Materials for Dossier must include:

• Cover sheet obtained from the Provost’s office.
• A comprehensive CV with teaching, scholarship, and service activities of the candidate.
• Personal Statement that includes a description of the candidate’s area of scholarship
• Separate self-evaluations for teaching, scholarship, service and integration
• Each self-evaluation shall include a summary of activities, selected products or accomplishments, and evidence of recognition itemized by year over the relevant Review Period

 If included in the vita, the candidate should separate the following categories:

• refereed books or book chapters
• refereed journal articles
• invited book chapters or articles
• invited conference presentations
• contributed conference presentations
• seminars and/or colloquia
• grant proposals submitted and grants funded
• unrefereed publications

The candidate may choose to include other categories as appropriate to the discipline and the candidate’s record.  On papers, grants funded, and other scholarly products, full author lists must match the publication or grant funded.

Section 6.02 Documentation of Collaborative Scholarly Contributions

In complying with the University Faculty Handbook document entitled “Retention, Tenure and Promotion Rights & Responsibilities,” Article 1, Paragraph e, on the requirement to detail scholarly collaboration, candidates in the College of Letters and Science will include this information in a single document in a format recommended by the department.

Section 6.03 Peer Review Solicitation Procedure

The process and requirements for soliciting peer review materials are described in the University Faculty Handbook, “Annual Review, Retention, Tenure and Promotion,” subsection “RTP: Rights and Responsibilities,” section 7.

Evaluators should be specialists in the candidate’s field and familiar with the usual expectations for faculty performance. Departments should elaborate how these guidelines apply to their disciplines and must send the role and scope document to evaluators. The majority of the outside evaluators must be selected by the department head and/or departmental committee; the remainder may come from a list of names submitted by the candidate. Candidates shall not be informed of the identity of outside evaluators to protect the confidentiality of the review process.

Guidelines regarding who may and may not serve as referees are elaborated in the Faculty Handbook on “Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Rights and Responsibilities as follows:

3.c. No person may participate in the review of any person with whom they have a personal, business, or professional relationship that could be perceived to preclude objective application of professional judgment. A conflict of interest occurs when the evaluating party could realize personal, financial, professional, or other gain or loss as a result of the outcome of the review process, or when the objectivity of the evaluating party could be impaired by virtue of the relationship. Examples of persons who may be excluded by professional relationship include undergraduate and/or graduate mentors, postdoctoral mentors, collaborators who are co-investigators on grants and/or co-authors on a significant portion of scholarly products completed during the review period, colleagues who depend on instrumentation controlled or operated by the candidate, and/or co-inventor of a patent.

Five or more external review letters must be requested by that party specified in sec. 4.03, and must NOT be solicited by the candidate. The department report should state clearly how external referees were chosen and should include a brief statement of their status in the field. Referees should state either knowledge of or relationship to the candidate, if any.

External evaluators should be sent a copy of the unit’s role and scope, the candidate’s vita, a brief statement that identifies the candidate’s area of scholarship, as well as a selection of relevant publications and/or unpublished manuscripts, along with other materials, as appropriate and selected by the candidate.  They should be asked to comment specifically on the quality of the candidate’s written scholarship and his or her productivity, as well as the candidate’s recognition in the field.

 

Section 7.01 Retention Review 

Candidates for retention are reviewed under the standards and indicators in the Role and Scope documents in effect on the first date of employment in a tenurable position.

Section 7.02 Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor Review

Candidates for tenure are reviewed under the standards and indicators in the Role and Scope documents in effect on the first date of employment in a tenurable position. Candidates may select a more recent, approved Role and Scope document by notifying the primary review committee.

Section 7.03 Promotion to Professor Review

A candidate for promotion to Full Professor will be reviewed using standards and indicators in the Role and Scope documents in effect two (2) years prior to the deadline for notification of intent to apply for promotion. Candidates may select a more recent, approved Role and Scope document by notifying the primary review committee.

For retention, a faculty member must demonstrate effectiveness in all areas of the candidate’s assignment: teaching, scholarship, and service as described in the University Faculty Handbook, “Retention, Promotion, and Tenure: Candidate’s Rights and Responsibilities.” Teaching and scholarship are considered to be of primary and equal value Service, however, is also an important feature of every faculty member’s role.

Faculty members must also demonstrate the integration of no less than two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service.

Faculty members must also demonstrate satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for tenure by the candidate’s tenure review year.

Teaching:

CLS expects faculty to contribute to the general education of Montana State University students, to the educational experience of students majoring in the many central disciplines of the College and where appropriate, to the graduate programs of students pursuing post-baccalaureate degrees. In addition to the university teaching criteria above, the College recognizes other faculty contributions, such as participation in the University Core, the Honors program, direction of independent study, undergraduate research and graduate research, and advising of undergraduate and graduate students.

Academic advising of students is an important component of teaching effectiveness in cases where faculty are assigned this responsibility.

Scholarship:

The diverse nature of the College encourages a wide variety of scholarly activity. All faculty members with research expectations are expected to develop a record of scholarly contributions that is consistently of high quality and sustained over time.

Service:

Service is important to the College of Letters and Science and will vary according to individual departmental and faculty roles.

Section 8.01 Timing of Retention Review

Faculty are reviewed for retention in the academic year specified in their Letter of Hire, unless extended under the Extending Tenure Review Period policy.

Section 8.02 University Standard

The standards for the retention of probationary faculty members are:

• Effectiveness in teaching, scholarship and service during the review period, and
• Integration of no less than two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for tenure by the candidate's tenure review year.
• Satisfactory progress towards meeting the standards for tenure by the candidate’s tenure review year.

Section 8.03   Performance Indicators and Weighting

Weighting and performance indicators for teaching, scholarship, and service and integration as described in the University Faculty Handbook, will be specified in Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Teaching:

Effectiveness in teaching shall be demonstrated through evaluation by peers and colleagues within the University through in-depth assessment of teaching performance and curricular enhancement and innovation that draws upon current and/or former students, graduates, colleagues, and/or clients. Candidates shall follow the methods for in-depth assessment of teaching performance established by the department. Standards for weighted teaching and performance indicators will be elaborated by the departments.

Scholarship:

Publication, scholarly productivity, or funding appropriate to national norms in each discipline, as defined by the departments, will serve as the criteria for evaluation.

Service:

In addition to the requirements in the University Faculty Handbook, the dossier should include the candidate’s professional service activities to the University, the profession, and local, national and international communities. This includes information about committee assignments, offices held, editing duties, service to professional organizations, outreach, and other professional tasks relevant to the candidate’s defined role.

Section 8.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Consistent with the University Faculty Handbook and the standards below, in light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, quantitative and qualitative expectations will be specified in the Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Teaching:

Faculty performance in teaching will be judged effective if it is consistent over time and of high quality and meets or exceeds the standards set by the candidate’s department.

Scholarship:

Faculty performance in scholarship will be judged effective if it is consistent over time and of high quality and meets or exceeds the standards set by the candidate’s department.

Service:

Faculty performance in service will be judged effective if it furthers the mission of the department, college, university, or profession, is of high quality, and if it meets or exceeds the standards of the candidate’s department.

Section 8.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

Teaching:

Student evaluations should be both quantitative and qualitative: quantitative in order to allow comparison with other teachers, and qualitative to enable students to elaborate on their perceptions of strengths and weaknesses of the teacher. Because student evaluations are vulnerable to different types of bias, they should not be the sole measure of teaching effectiveness.

Peer evaluations, instructor-provided materials, and other evidence described in the Departmental Role and Scope document must also be included and considered.

Scholarship:

In light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, evidence of performance indicators, such as publications, grant activity, and other scholarly products, and the standards and methods that will be used to assess them, will be elaborated in Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Service:

In light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, evidence of performance indicators in the area of service, such as professional, university, and community service, will be elaborated in the Departmental Role and Scope documents.

To achieve tenure, faculty members must demonstrate:

• Sustained effectiveness in teaching and service during the review period, and
• Integration of no less than two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and
• Accomplishment in scholarship as defined in the University Faculty Handbook document entitled “Retention, Tenure and Promotion Review: Definitions.”

Section 9.01   Timing of Tenure Review

Faculty are normally reviewed for tenure in the academic year specified in their Letter of Hire, unless extended under the Extending Tenure Review Period policy.

Faculty members who wish to initiate a review for tenure before the date specified must notify the primary review administrator(s) by the date established by the provost. For mandatory reviews (i.e., retention and tenure), the provost will notify candidates, heads, and deans of the faculty scheduled for mandatory reviews each year.

Section 9.02   University Standards

The University standards for the award of tenure are:

• Sustained effectiveness in teaching and service during the review period, and
• Integration of no less than two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and
• Accomplishment in scholarship.

Section 9.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

Weighting and performance indicators for promotion and tenure in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service as described in the University Faculty Handbook will be specified in Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Section 9.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Consistent with the University Faculty Handbook and the standards below, in light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, quantitative and qualitative expectations for promotion and tenure will be specified in the Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Section 9.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

Teaching:

Student evaluations should be both quantitative and qualitative: quantitative in order to allow comparison with other teachers, and qualitative to enable students to elaborate on their perceptions of strengths and weaknesses of the teacher. Because student evaluations are vulnerable to different types of bias, they should not be the sole measure of teaching effectiveness.

Peer evaluations, instructor-provided materials, and other evidence described in the Departmental Role and Scope document must also be included and considered.

Scholarship:

In light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, evidence of performance indicators, such as publications, grant activity, and other scholarly products, and the standards and methods that will be used to assess them, will be elaborated in Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Service:

In light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, evidence of performance indicators in the area of service, such as professional, university, and community service, will be elaborated in the Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Section 10.01. University Standards

The University standards for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor are the standards for the award of tenure. Appointment at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor does not demonstrate, in and of itself, that standards for tenure have been met.

Section 11.01 Timing of Review

Normally, faculty applying for promotion to full professor are reviewed after completing at least five (5) years of service in the current rank. However, faculty may seek promotion earlier if they can establish that they meet the same standards of effectiveness and accomplishment or excellence used in evaluating candidates after five (5) years in rank.

Section 11.02 University Standard

To achieve promotion to rank of professor, faculty members must demonstrate:

• Sustained effectiveness in teaching and service during the review period, and
• Integration of no less than two of the following during the review period: teaching, scholarship, and service, and
• Excellence in scholarship as defined in the Faculty Handbook document entitled “Retention, Tenure and Promotion Review: Definitions.”

Section 11.03 Performance Indicators and Weighting

Weighting and performance indicators for promotion to professor in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service as described in the University Faculty Handbook, “Retention, Tenure, and Promotion: Review Definitions,” will be specified in Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Section 11.04 Quantitative and Qualitative Expectations

Consistent with the University Faculty Handbook and the standards below, in light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, quantitative and qualitative expectations for promotion to professor will be specified in the Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Section 11.05 Evidence of Performance Indicators

Teaching:

Student evaluations should be both quantitative and qualitative: quantitative in order to allow comparison with other teachers, and qualitative to enable students to elaborate on their perceptions of strengths and weaknesses of the teacher. Because student evaluations are vulnerable to different types of bias, they should not be the sole measure of teaching effectiveness.

Peer evaluations, instructor-provided materials, and other evidence described in the Departmental Role and Scope document must also be included and considered.

Scholarship:

In light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, evidence of performance indicators, such as publications, grant activity, and other scholarly products, and the standards and methods that will be used to assess them, will be elaborated in Departmental Role and Scope documents.

Service:

In light of the diverse disciplines included in the College of Letters and Science, evidence of performance indicators in the area of service, such as professional, university, and community service, will be elaborated in the Departmental Role and Scope documents.

All faculty members in the College of Letters and Science are entitled to propose changes to this Role and Scope Document.

If the College of Letters and Science review committee or the dean identifies a need for improvement, clarification, or other revision to a unit’s Role and Scope Document, they may submit the request for changes to the Chair of URTPC who will forward the recommendations to the unit. Submission to the Chair of URTPC should occur after the review committee or administrator completes all of its reviews for the year.

Units will act on any proposed changes received from the Chair on an annual basis and will undertake a full review of their Document no less than every three years.

All updates and revisions must be approved as set forth in Article XIII.

Section 13.01 Primary Academic Unit Role and Scope Document

• Tenurable faculty and administrator of the primary academic unit;
• Promotion and tenure review committee and administrator of all associatedintermediate units (usually colleges);
• University Retention Tenure and Promotion Committee (URTPC); and
• Provost.

Section 13.02 Intermediate Academic Unit Role and Scope Document

• Promotion and tenure review committee and administrator of the intermediate unit;
• University Retention Tenure and Promotion Committee (URTPC)); and
• Provost.

Section 13.03 University Role and Scope Document

• University Retention Tenure and Promotion Committee (URTPC);
• Faculty Senate;
• Deans' Council; and
• Provost.